Article on Kansas Carry

This is a discussion on Article on Kansas Carry within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; This article clerly articulates the thoughts of those who think that there is some inherant "danger of concealed handguns."
http://www.gunguys.com/?p=1916
Kansas Towns Fight NRA Preemption ...

Article on Kansas Carry

Kansas Towns Fight NRA Preemption Law
The latest state to suffer from the threat of an NRA concealed weapons preemption bill is Kansas. Even though concealed guns have been outlawed there since the 1800s, the legislature, under the influence of the gun lobby, recently passed a concealed weapons bill there, above the protests of the citizens. And now, because small towns still have the right to protect themselves from the dangers of concealed firearms, the NRA is barking to take that away from them too.

Davis, who with his wife operates a Cheesecake Express business at craft shows and music festivals across the state, said city ordinances and county resolutions make a mockery of the state’s concealed-weapon law by further limiting places where permit holders can go in public with a hidden gun.

“Through their interpretation,” he said, “they think they can amend the existing state law and apply their own rules and regulations.”

Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, and Rep. Candy Ruff, D-Leavenworth, are moving to protect Davis’ freedom of movement when packing heat. They are pushing a bill stripping cities and counties of power to regulate where concealed handguns are allowed.

How dare these small towns actually try and pass laws that protect their citizens! Just because the NRA moved in with a lobby and passed a bill the majority of the people didn’t want doesn’t mean these cities have the right to make their own rules about who can carry firearms in their vicinity! Oh wait, it kind of does mean that.

Dale Goter, lobbyist with the city of Wichita, said restrictions on cities and counties in House Bill 2528 went too far. The goal should be balanced state and local oversight to protect the public from criminal acts, he said.

“It’s gone beyond common sense and reasonableness,” he said of the bill. “When gun laws are outlawed, you can guarantee every outlaw will have a gun, including every gang member in Wichita.”

Eric Sartorius, representing Overland Park, said he couldn’t reconcile prohibitions in state law with the bill’s intent to strip municipal governments of authority to refine conceal-and-carry boundaries.

He said it doesn’t stand to reason state law forbids concealed weapons at professional or school sporting events, but requires Overland Park to allow such weapons at all other sporting events.

This is the craziest thing about concealed carry laws. Most concealed carry laws still have exclusions– they don’t allow firearms in schools, for example, or public libraries. In this case, the state law doesn’t allow firearms at school or professional sporting events. Apparently, firearms aren’t safe in those places. But how, then, do firearms magically become “safe” everywhere else? If guns really protected us, wouldn’t we want them in schools and libraries? The fact is we don’t want them in those places because firearms don’t protect us– they only represent a threat.

And to actually pass a law to restrict these towns from fighting that threat is nonsense. The NRA is denying these towns their own right to self defense– the defense against the danger of concealed firearms. By passing a concealed weapons law, the Kansas legislature put all the citizens in the state at risk. And by passing a preemption law, they would take away the last defense smaller towns and cities have against that risk itself.

...<snip>....
“It’s gone beyond common sense and reasonableness,” he said of the bill. “When gun laws are outlawed, you can guarantee every outlaw will have a gun, including every gang member in Wichita.”

I am always interested in hearing the "other side" of an issue. It helps me to either reaffirm or rethink my position. In this case it reaffirms.

I'm fascinated that they see that they apparently don't think that outlaws currently have guns. And doesn't the term "outlaw" imply someone that has no regard for the law?? How can there be so many people on the other side of what appears, to me at least, to be a clear cut issue? Oh well, at least the tide seems to have turned in our favor for now. Let them stew in their fear of "Honest Citizens" with guns!!

Rarely do I see something so overtly biased being passed off as reporting and not editorializing. Someone should send that reporter back to school or at least to a dictionary to teach him the difference.

In this case, the state law doesn’t allow firearms at school or professional sporting events. Apparently, firearms aren’t safe in those places. But how, then, do firearms magically become “safe” everywhere else?

Well they ARE safe in those places. This argument is a great example of circular reasoning. Go pull the wool over some sheeple eyes, Gunguy idiots! These prohibitions were a compromise to those legislators sitting on the fence. It took a LONG time to get CCH hashed out in KS, however it's strong enough now that Queen Kathleen was overidden TWICE. Now the next step is to get these prohibitions removed.

Those silly Kansans!

Originally Posted by sgtD

Just because the NRA moved in with a lobby and passed a bill the majority of the people didn’t want doesn’t mean these cities have the right to make their own rules

Why are those silly Kansans electing a legislature that passes laws they don't want? They should just vote them out of office, get new legislators and repeal the law. They could also ban the NRA from setting foot in Kansas while they are at it. Obviously the NRA is guilty of seducing and misleading those legislators, who can't think for themselves and give the people what they want.

He's absolutely right...

This is the craziest thing about concealed carry laws. Most concealed carry laws still have exclusions– they don’t allow firearms in schools, for example, or public libraries. In this case, the state law doesn’t allow firearms at school or professional sporting events. Apparently, firearms aren’t safe in those places. But how, then, do firearms magically become “safe” everywhere else? If guns really protected us, wouldn’t we want them in schools and libraries?

The guns are safe everywhere and we should be allowed to carry them everywhere. I would call on the author to join us in repealing these prohibited places so we can carry everywhere.

Based on the rest of his writing I'm guessing he will not join us in this fight.

“It’s gone beyond common sense and reasonableness,” he said of the bill. “When gun laws are outlawed, you can guarantee every outlaw will have a gun, including every gang member in Wichita.”

Every gang member in Wichita probably has their own gun. That is why we fought so hard and long for concealed carry, you stupid twit. If the trash has guns, we should be allowed to protect ourselves, you idiot. Out of all the CCW people in the country, I can only remember a handfull of those legal to "pack heat" doing something against the law with their firearms, you piece of garbage. It is the criminals that we are armed against you pudding head.

Go crawl back under the rock you came from. Get out of my life, you non-reporting the truth fool. I feel better now.

In this case, the state law doesn’t allow firearms at school or professional sporting events. Apparently, firearms aren’t safe in those places.

Laws on the books are merely a reflection of the political power or lack of political will wielded by those who put it on the books. It is not necessarily a reflection of reality. More often, it's merely how folks choose to see things, and not how they are.

Actually, criminals are, by definition, unsafe everywhere they go. Citizens are at risk everywhere criminals go. Criminals go everywhere citizens do. Hence, citizens are at-risk everywhere. Everywhere. In a nutshell, self-defense firearms in the hands of citizens help turn the tables, such that someone other than criminals has actual defensive power to resist attack. ANYTHING that puts criminals at risk and helps citizens defend themselves can be nothing other than a good thing.

If guns really protected us, wouldn’t we want them in schools and libraries? The fact is we don’t want them in those places because firearms don’t protect us– they only represent a threat.

Uncertain who this "we" is. My gun does, pointedly, protect me. The mere fact I'm carrying also means it has some protective value to those immediately surrounding me. Threat? To nobody anywhere, as I'm a good guy and upstanding citizen. Folks feel threatened by that? That remains their problem. I will not allow that to become my problem.

In the end, there is simply no getting around reality: my being able to defend myself improves my security. One hundred people each now able to protect themselves represent 100 more-secure people. Taken to the logical extreme, if every upstanding citizen in an area were packing a firearm, then every upstanding citizen would be more secure. Even in Kansas, where reality bites just as often as anywhere else.

Rarely do I see something so overtly biased being passed off as reporting and not editorializing. Someone should send that reporter back to school or at least to a dictionary to teach him the difference.

This is from the website gunguys.com, a highly anti-gun website. It's not meant to be unbiased. It's like complaining about biased reporting in an article on nra.org (or worse, goa.org). This isn't some AP article or from any other reputable journalism source (well, as reputable as you can expect of them--at least they try to look unbiased).

Kansas Towns Fight NRA Preemption Law
The latest state to suffer from the threat of an NRA concealed weapons preemption bill is Kansas. Even though concealed guns have been outlawed there since the 1800s, the legislature, under the influence of the gun lobby, recently passed a concealed weapons bill there, above the protests of the citizens. And now, because small towns still have the right to protect themselves from the dangers of concealed firearms, the NRA is barking to take that away from them too.

How dare these small towns actually try and pass laws that protect their citizens! Just because the NRA moved in with a lobby and passed a bill the majority of the people didn’t want doesn’t mean these cities have the right to make their own rules about who can carry firearms in their vicinity! Oh wait, it kind of does mean that.

And to actually pass a law to restrict these towns from fighting that threat is nonsense. The NRA is denying these towns their own right to self defense– the defense against the danger of concealed firearms. By passing a concealed weapons law, the Kansas legislature put all the citizens in the state at risk. And by passing a preemption law, they would take away the last defense smaller towns and cities have against that risk itself.

Nice how they blame the NRA for everything, as if Kansans weren't able to elect people themselves.

Now, I'm not a big fan of lobbying myself; I do think lobbyists have too much influence at the Federal level, because the people are so separated from the government at that level.

But at the state level? And in a state with the population of Kansas? I'm sorry, no. The lobbying influence is much less there, and individual votes carry far more weight for positions such as state legislators. If the people of Kansas really didn't like this, they'd be up in arms, and new legislators running on an anti-gun platform would be elected.

Instead, what we've seen is a state-by-state sweeping trend of pro-gun, pro-CCW legislation. Not national, but at the state level, where I feel the government much better represents the will of the people. The Democrats have even admitted that they believe Al Gore's anti-gun stance cost him the 2000 election. Democrats all over the country now are shrewdly avoiding the gun issue because they know that they'll lose elections (which are voted by the people, not the NRA or other lobbyists) if they bring that up. So where does this nutcase get off claiming "the majority" of people don't want CCW laws?

It must be really convenient in these peoples' minds to blame "lobbyists" or the NRA every time laws are passed that they don't like, instead of realizing it's being done by politicians voted in directly by the people.

I'm no fan of the anti-gun laws in Illinois, and I do believe they're unconstitutional, but do I believe that the people of Illinois (esp. those in Chicago) disagree with those laws? Hell no. I'm sure the people of Illinois fully support all those stupid anti-gun laws, or else they would have voted in some pro-gun politicians by now. Does anyone run around claiming Illinois' anti-gun laws are the product of the anti-gun lobby, and not the way people vote there? I don't see it; people like us just blame the Illinois people for voting stupidly.

Kansas... Now isn't that the land of Vern Miller, the Kansas State Attorney General in the early 1970's who managed to get the airlines banned from serving alcohol while flying at 35,000 feet when they were over the State of Kansas? Go figure! Those wacky Kansasan's

Wow I did not realize how strong the NRA is. The NRA was able to convince 2/3rds the legislature and Senate to vote the CCW laws in not just once or twice but four times to get around the governor and the “majority” of Kansans that are apposed to concealed carry. The Governor must have been protecting the majority of Kansans that are apposed to concealed carry by vetoing the legislation.